Docket: A-390-13
Citation:
2014 FCA 70
CORAM: PELLETIER J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
WEBB J.A.
|
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
SVETLANA FOTINOV, CITIZEN OF CANADA
|
|
AND CITIZEN OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
|
|
Appellant
|
|
and
|
|
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA
|
|
Respondent
|
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT
GAUTHIER J.A.
[1]
The respondent, the Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”), seeks the preliminary
dismissal of the appeal on the basis that the said appeal has no reasonable
chance of success, is frivolous and constitutes an abuse of process.
[2]
RBC’s motion is made in writing pursuant to Rule 369 of the Federal
Courts Rules, SOR/98-106. On February 11, 2014, Sharlow J.A. issued a
direction to determine how the Registry was to treat the appellant’s motion
record given that the appellant was seeking further orders against RBC as well
as an oral hearing to determine RBC’s motion referred to above. Sharlow J.A.
noted that the record disclosed no basis for granting an oral hearing. I agree
and for the same reasons, the appellant’s further request for an oral hearing
is dismissed.
[3]
The appellant’s appeal concerns the decision of McVeigh J. of the
Federal Court (“the judge”) whereby she dismissed the appellant’s Statement of
Claim for want of jurisdiction. Since the judge was proceeding on a de novo
basis, as she was reviewing a decision of a prothonotary to the same effect
that was vital to the disposition of the case, she allowed the appellant to
bring forth any argument that the appellant deemed necessary to oppose RBC’s
motion to strike the Statement of Claim on the basis that the Federal Court had
no jurisdiction to grant the relief sought.
[4]
As mentioned by Mainville J.A. in Lessard-Gauvin v. Canada (Attorney General), 2013 FCA 147 at paragraph 8, the standard for preliminary dismissal
of an appeal is high. It must be plain and obvious that the appeal has no
reasonable chance of success and that it is clearly bound to fail.
[5]
With these principles in mind, I am satisfied that it is plain and
obvious that the Federal Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appellant’s
claim for damages against RBC or to order RBC to provide various documents,
information and explanations on the basis that RBC did not meet the disclosure
requirements (more particularly, what is referred to as the consumer section
provisions) of the Bank Act, S.C. 1991, c. 46 (“the Act”) and of the
regulations adopted thereunder.
[6]
The Federal Court is a statutory court. Either the Federal Courts Act,
R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, or some other federal statute must confer jurisdiction to
it over a matter. Provincial superior courts have jurisdiction to administer
federal law, as well as provincial law. In the present case, the word “Court”
is defined in section 2 of the Act to mean the various provincial courts
described therein. As mentioned by the judge, there are some specific
provisions in the Act that confer jurisdiction to the Federal Court such as section
977, where an appeal lies to the Federal Court of certain decisions of the
Minister (see also the following provisions: 617.2(7), 624(2), 647.1(7),
654(2), 964(7)). None of these provisions are involved here.
[7]
The appellant also alleges in her Statement of Claim that RBC violated
her rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (sections
7, 8 and 15). For the reasons explained by the judge at paragraph 34 of her
judgment, it is clear and obvious that such claims cannot succeed.
[8]
In the circumstances, it is neither useful nor necessary to deal with
the various requests for disclosure and the other orders sought by the appellant
in her Cross-Motion.
[9]
However, as RBC is seeking costs, it is worth noting that this is not
the first time that a Statement of Claim filed by the appellant against RBC
based on the same general facts is struck for lack of jurisdiction by a judge
of the Federal Court (see order of Boivin J., dated May 8, 2013 in T-443-13).
[10]
In view of the foregoing, I propose that this motion be granted and that
the appeal be dismissed with costs.
“Johanne Gauthier”
“I agree
J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A.”
“I agree
Wyman W.Webb J.A.”
Email this Content